Search results

The reason to do so is not to like give player world building authority. It's to give yourself flexibility to frame situations that resonate with PC interests and like put them under pressure. You still retain the overall authority. You are just expected to use it in pursuit of maintaining the...

Good Narrativist GMs at least. The context for these conversations was "let's do Narrativism". Trying to extrapolate them to a general audience is not a very sound idea. Particularly when we have Vincent in other contexts designing OSR material and talking about how much he loves Moldvay.

In the vast majority of Narrativist games the GM has content and scene framing authority. They are just instructed in how to utilize it. You provided authority but only to serve particular purposes. But like at the end of day if you enjoy world building for its own sake you should run a game...

In a lot of cases the GM I want restrained is me. The reason I want myself restrained is to remove things from my sphere influence I do not want to be responsible for. I also kind of want my players to keep me accountable. That instead of focusing on being some mythical Good GM I can just focus...

So, it's not the same rules. The rules are different for different roles. But there are rules that apply. The GM role is different from game to game. Being an Apocalypse World MC is not the same as being the GM of Into The Odd is not the same as being the GM of Burning Wheel. The rules for the...

So, when we're talking about gameable space we're talking fictional space that can be approached fundamentally from a we're playing a game perspective. We're not addressing all of RPG play or more exploratory play. Game as game. Not talking about individual mechanics here. I'm talking about...

@Crimson Longinus So, when it comes to gameable space, I think it depends on what you mean by rules. Like, I don't think we need fortune mechanics, but in the sense of a consistent play agenda and process that guides our decisions about what happens next we absolutely need an agreement in...

So, I think content authority should be a separate concern - but like the ability to meaningfully impact the fiction through your characters' actions and not just your autonomy should be included. But really all these factors should be part of a broader conversation and not have assumed levels...

Boundless exploration within a GM designed sandbox isn't what is special about the medium. It is what some people like about some roleplaying games. Trying to make the entire medium fit into a boundless exploration box erases the rest of us who are not here for that. It's like saying area...

I'm not saying we need inviolable rules, but plenty of roleplaying games have inviolable rules without codifying every possible action. Marvel Heroic RP, Blades in the Dark, Apocalypse World are all examples. Like you can build in constrained judgement into your game design so that it can...

I guess one of the things I would ask those who want agency to include autonomy, instead of player ability to effect change in the shared fiction is how we can get to a point where we as a community can meaningfully discuss the latter without having to write novels? What's the solution to having...

I personally believe more conventional definitions of agency within the context of RPGs (which tend to ignore efficacy portion of the dictionary definition) are basically used to set a bar that if you try to reach over (if you have expectations about efficacy, ability to gain credible...

There is no set amount. There are times where I am willing to accept less agency if it means a more compelling gameplay, setting, story or because what we are trying to do demands it. But I think mindful of what we are giving up is good practice. I also mostly speak up for the idea that it's...

I have bolded the parts that come across as accusations, as if laying claim to a purer form of play. If that's not meant than perhaps leave those parts out. If you want to hash it out, we can hash it out, but throwing in these jabs does us no good. You seem to be saying a whole lot more about...

I still do not get the objective label. Undefined / Defined make much more sense as a distinction. It's not like the undefined portions of a setting are like your opinion man. We just have not done the work to define them. No one would say the part of their characters' life not included in...

Any GMs here who think their players interact with NPCs as abstract concepts? Who do not treat them as real people? Anyone here treat religion, philosophy, etc. as narrative backdrops? Giving a crap isn't a technique no matter how many not-so-subtle digs you try to throw in.

And if that is not enough agency for a player's taste? If they want more than a selection, but want to set their own agenda? Are they being unreasonable to either provide that feedback or move on to a game with more agency? Are players allowed to want more say?

We have a simple disagreement here. I believe the gameable space includes the shared fiction (or shared imagined space as I prefer to use) we all know and are all bound to. Stuff that is written down, but not revealed and may yet be revised is not gameable because there is no real way to assess...

I think we all need to be constrained (players and GMs) to a certain extent. We are engaged in a shared activity and as such establishing a set of clear expectations with each other about what play will look like and that we can use to keep each other accountable and to make sure we're rowing in...

I think there's room for fruitful voids like in Dogs in the Vineyard where we live what is sin and what is the proper punishment for a sin up to individual dogs. But also room for defined honor and glory in Legend of Five Rings where the fruitful void is more what you are willing to give up for...